Sorry, but "separate but egual" is not equal nor Constitutional. Funny
how many of those who support "civil unions" today are those who fought
adamantly against them until marriage equality became a real reality. All of a
sudden they are crying "Why aren't civil unions enough".
Sorry...but gay men and women are not going to settle for table scraps any more.
We've been invited to join the table and we are going to take our
righteous seat.

All the whining sounds and looks just like George Wallace and those who fought
against equal rights for blacks in the 50's and 60's. It was bigotry
then and it is now.You should be ashamed of yourselves. My marriage
is not threatened if gays marry. As for 'traditional
marriage'... the mormons above all have no leg to stand on with plural
marriage in the heritage, both with more than one wife as well as more than one
husband."separate but equal" is still bigoted, hateful and not
right.

You seem to be forgetting the second part of Amendment 3, "No other domestic
union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or
substantially equivalent legal effect."

Same-sex couples in Utah
were prohibited by Utah Constitutional Amendment from having civil unions or
domestic partnerships or anything else.

When Amendment 3 was up for
a vote, many opponents pointed to the scond part and warned it would cause
trouble by creating an "all or nothing" situation. That is exactly what
happened and, due to the verbiage of the Amendment, there is no option other
than marriage for same-sex couples.

Gary, guess what? Your own marriage is nothing more than a "civil
union". It required a governmental license (civil) in order to be legal.
Why call a union between people, that is in every way the same, something else?
You just want to feel special over other couples?

"Proposition 8 served no
purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of
gays and lesbians in California," the Ninth Circuit said in its ruling on
appeal in the case of Perry v. Brown.'

We act as if homosexuality was invented yesterday and a host of new folks were
found who all of a sudden needed rights bestowed upon them. Civilizations have
dealt with homosexuality for millenia. Marriage has generally not been a part
of the equation (yes, I have read the minor exceptions - they are few and
unconvincing).

It seems foolish to take institutions - marriage and
the family - that have been with us for millenia and change them all rather
suddenly. We are moving the foundation blocks about without knowing how this is
all going to play out and whether the structure will continue to stand.

Using racial intermarriage as an example, it might have been illegal in the US
at one time but it goes back to biblical times so it is not a good comparison
when looking at long-term consequences.

"You mean thinks like hanging them, sending them
to concentration camps, and castrating them? By all means, let's not
progress as a community and improve how we treat one another."

See if you can follow me here...I'll go slow. Nobody is advocating
homosexuals being hung, beaten, or sent to concentration camps...okay? Twin
Lights and others are simply making the point that marriage throughout recorded
history has been between a man and woman. I realize this presents problems for
homosexual activists and their agenda, but facts are what they are.

First, unlike homosexuals, man and woman can procreate and continue the
species (wow, what a concept!). Secondly, it serves children best to have a mom
and dad, and the unique influences both have on the child's development. I
understand there are always exceptions, but generally this has proven true.
Doubt me? Look at the high crime rates among young black people in this
country. Couple this with the fact that nearly 70% of black children have no
father. The missing influence of the father for black children, in this
particular instance, cannot be ignored or denied.

"Nobody is advocating homosexuals being hung, beaten, or sent to
concentration camps...okay?"

First, yes they are. Listen to
rightwing talk radio. There's no shortage of people wanting to make being
gay a crime. Second, are you suggesting that as long as physical violence is
avoided, other forms of persecution and bigotry are OK?

"First,
unlike homosexuals, man and woman can procreate and continue the species (wow,
what a concept!)" Lots of gays have kids of their own, and adopt children.
Conversely, many straight couples don't have kids.

"Secondly, it serves children best to have a mom and dad, and the unique
influences both have on the child's development." There's no
objective, testable evidence to suggest this is true.

Your statistic
about young blacks and crime has infinitely more to do with the economic,
educational and social barriers faced by young black men than whether or not
their fathers are present.

Courts have held repeatedly that
"separate but equal" is _not_ constitutional, and Amendment 3 outlaws
civil unions anyway.